wow, that's crazy...maybe it's made with bits of real panther?
"No, she gets a special cologne...It's called Sex Panther by Odeon. It's illegal in nine countries...Yep, it's made with bits of real panther, so you know it's good...They've done studies, you know. Sixty percent of the time, it works every time." -Anchorman.
well, I can't link to the article from work, but...
March 27 2009, 11:40 AM
I think I can guess as to what's going on...
I often think of my self as this stupid too, on occasion....the way I chase after cardboard with my hard-earned dollars. But at least I don't throw tens or hundreds of thousands at things that resemble newspaper clipping cutouts, like strip cards or Texas Tommys
Other great moments in stupidity, as man is only to be outdone by himself:
-investing in stocks based on "eyeballs"
-The tulip craze of Holland
-following madmen into wars
-tuning in each week to watch American Idol
-trying to figure out the effect of the international date line on world currency trades
Thats insane! You could buy a very decent looking authentic single signed ball of Ruth for that price. Or a handful of nice various Ruth cards from his playing days. All because he has a blue cap instead of a white one! nuts....
I agree. Dumb is in the eye of the beholder. It's been argued several times. I would never pay the kind of prices people are willing to pay for some card in a PSA 10 holder. Did you see that 1956 Koufax in the Mile High Auction? It was in a PSA 10 holder and went for $49,019. That's about $48,000 too much in my opinion!
...collecting art or memorabilia is similar to a pyramid scheme. The $7,000+ spent on a 2009 Babe Ruth figure is only "dumb" when the pyramid falls apart. Given the expectation of diminished value of modern memorabilia (e.g., SLU figures), this looks like money poorly invested. But it only becomes a poor investment if and when that market crashes.
The same can be said of vintage cards, which people here obviously feel more comfortable with given the longer history of value increases over time. But we could all be on a vintage card bubble, too.
I am not surprised although I am stunned at how expensive this madness is. I do slightly and respectfully disagree, however, with the attempts to correlate the obsession with this "variant" to our collecting pieces of cardboard because the cards are 100 years old and have survived time and numerous paper drives from WW1 and WW2, much less moms throwing them out.
Maybe you could draw a parallel to the Magie T206 but please don't lump me in with the guys who spend "stupid money" (as my friend Pete Calderon used to call it) for these Ruth figurines which Jethro accidentally caused to have blue hats instead of white at the assembly line.
I think it's apples and oranges but that's just my 2 cents....
yes Bob, there is obviously a difference between true rarity and created rarity, but my point was that collecting anything can be argued as "dumb" by the non-collector.
If you're talking investment, then yeah, maybe the Ruth figure is a little more crazy than a Goudey Ruth (don't know for sure though as I have no clue about long term value of these figures). If you're talking just about the joy of collecting, then neither is more dumb than the other IMO.
My point is that history has already proven that figures will not have staying power. Line-ups were the end all be all and they died a very quick death.
The earlier McFarlane pieces have dropped in price.
This is a specific piece that was made just to get attention and there is no basis for it. This is far worse then a limited variation like a home and away jersey that has been done so much in the past.
I see the point in calling this "dumb", but I can't see any prospective where this piece will ever retain any value even at 1/4 what it is currently selling at.
I guess I have a broader prospective on this as I see action figure sell for tons of money and then a few years later are almost worthless.
I had actually thought that McFarlane had stopped these figures but they continue even though I see a great deal of them on the clearance sections at toy stores....
I just don't see this line continuing and once it dies, just like every other modern toy line the prices will drop and in a few years no one will even remember why they paid so much for this piece.
Looking for 1915 Cracker Jacks and 1909-11 American Caramel E90-1.
Reminds me a bit of the Beanie Baby craze. I remember people paying close to $2,000 for Humphrey the Camel (I'm actually ashamed that I remember his name) What a silly fad... I bet that Camel is worth under $100 now (but am not sure, as I don't follow these).
Anyway, Beanie Babies were displayed on numerous tables at Card Shows and in Card Shops... and even made it into many Sports Auctions like North Shore Sports, Centerfield Collectibles, and everyone's favorite... Coach's Corner (I now wonder if theirs were fakes?)
Popular culture artificats have a certain amount of staying time as collectibles. Some will stay longer than others. Claims that little cardboard pictures of men playing baseball 100 years ago will always retain some level of interest above little plastic statutes of men playing baseball today are impossible to make. In the short run, you may be right. In the long run, we'll all be dead.
I happen to agree and acknowledge that this $7,000 Ruth will be worth much much less in a short time frame. And I certainly hope my old cardboard will retain its value over the long haul. But it's the same genre -- baseball memorabilia -- from the same 100 year period in our history (1909-2009). What any of this will be worth in 2109 is anyone's guess.
Most folks think I am crazy when I spend a $100 on a card (they don't know, or care, about really expensive ones) but I just go about my hobby. The one thing about our hobby is that it's been around a long time. Collecting old cards has been going on at least about 70 yrs....and the values have gone mostly up, for the true rare, old cards. I don't think that is a fad....but who knows what the future will hold..
Seems awfully hypocritical to me that any collector would demean and belittle another collector's tastes. If someone with money to burn wants to spend thousands of dollars on an item which is guaranteed to have only three available on the open market (two more stay in the McFarlane archives), even if they are dated 2009, I say all the more power to them.
I don't think it is hypocritical at all. I have seen the rise and fall of a dozen or more toy/figure/statue lines over the years. You can not compare something that has been around for 12-15 years to baseball cards that have been around over 100.
You can't compare things that have a real value to something that was specifically manufactured to become the grail piece. What happens when the blue hat figure comes out on a different card next month, it happens all the time.
This guy spent 13+K on a piece that could be re-issued tomorrow, it has no real basis for value and there is no doubt in my mind that he has already lost money on it.
I actually have a lot of experience with this type of thing and when you think about what he could have gotten that would have real staying value for that money its nuts.
To each their own but anyone with experience in toys I think will very much agree with me on this one.
Looking for 1915 Cracker Jacks and 1909-11 American Caramel E90-1.
Excluding future but currently unknown stars, the value of current year issues-- including cards-- tends to go down. Modern collectors gravitate towards the brand new-- and in a year, this year's issues are last year's issues.
Who's to say the buyer bought the Ruth piece as an investment? It may well be worthless tomorrow (unlikely) but maybe it will always be worth the $13,000 that was spent on it to the person that bought it. That's all that matters.
I have about 300 Starting Lineups but I didn't buy them as an investment so I'm still glad I have them. I had a helluva lot of fun and have great memories of trading my "valuable" Canadian only pieces to US dealers and individuals for figures that weren't available up here. Don't we all collect things that interest us and that we have a passion for? If not, we're collecting for the wrong reasons.
This message has been edited by johnh19 on Mar 30, 2009 12:10 PM This message has been edited by johnh19 on Mar 30, 2009 12:06 PM